1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to audio/video devices and more particularly to such devices that are body or seat mounted and meant for use while the user is in a sitting or reclined position.
2. Description of the Related Art
Presently there is an accelerated evolution in audio/video (A/V) display technology. This rapid advancement, however, is being impeded by numerous obstacles. Such advancements will continue to define the methods we receive, transmit and interact with A/V information.
Body mounted A/V devices are challenged with even greater problems most of which involve the physical proximity of such devices to the human body. Complex physiological and ergonomic problems must be solved before body mounted devices can achieve an advantage over those which are not. Cost also plays a significant role when comparing these two types of devices. A variety of electro-optical technologies are in competition to solve these problems including: LCD (Liquid Crystal Display), LED (Light emitting diode), Laser Scanning and Active Matrix.
Airlines are one of the leading mass transit mediums experimenting with the incorporation of audio/video information systems aboard their vehicles. Some airlines incorporate large projection screens similar to movie theaters. LCD's are also used. On some aircraft LCD's are physically embedded in the rear portion of the seats. This application usually allows a better vantage point and less distractions than viewing the larger screens centrally located on bulkhead partitions.
F.A.A and airline safety regulations are very stringent as to installing A/V devices. Ironically, one of the most nagging dilemmas presently facing use of A/V devices onboard airlines is not safety, but the fact that they cannot achieve "private viewing." Since present viewing devices are not private, airlines have been forced to institute self-censorship in order to eliminate "offensive" subject matter. Airlines see numerous advantages in being able to offer customers onboard entertainment, but they are also acutely aware of their passengers' desire for sensory privacy. In fact, there has been an increase in frivolous law suits filed by airline passengers who claimed they were offended or annoyed by onboard movies which they were unable to ignore.
With the advent of satellite "down linking", airlines will soon be able to offer passengers hundreds of different viewing channels. Future plans expand satellite "down linking" of information with satellite "up linking" in which information may be transmitted as well as received by each and every passenger. Unless private viewing devices can be offered, diversity in onboard A/V entertainment cannot hope to increase. Not just airlines but other forms of mass transit vehicles such as: buses, trains, cruise ships and even automobiles will soon be capable of offering a wide spectrum of onboard A/V entertainment; but they too will be faced with this social dilemma.
The often tedious experience of being confined for long periods of time while traveling is an appropriate arena for A/V entertainment. However, mass transit only exemplifies a growing trend towards sensory privacy common to all public or semi-public environments. A case in point involves a recent referendum put on the ballot in San Jose, Calif. calling for computer work stations to install private booths so as to "protect patrons from exposure to unwanted Internet viewing." Whenever A/V information systems avail themselves to a public or semi-public forum, especially where non-users are unable to avoid visual or audio contact, the same problem will present itself.
Some semi-public environments such as doctor's/dentist's office, hospital, etc. implement even stricter controls on environment which include safety factors. A body mounted A/V device might offer therapeutic value and also be more suited to the constraints of such environments.
"Virtual Reality" (V.R.) has become a buzz word in this new field of A/V technology because it can provide "virtual" involvement between the user and the projected fantasy world it provides. The user's "reality experience" becomes virtually "altered" as well as "deceived."
It is reasonable to say that the application of technology is almost limitless. A/V eyeglasses, which are body mounted, now offer high resolution private viewing. Such technologies project images onto a surface which is only a short distance from the user's eye, while others project the image via low powered laser directly onto the retina itself. The eyes and the brain's visual cortex are tricked into seeing the image appear to exist on a large screen several feet away from the user.
Presently, almost all body mounted A/V devices incorporate head mounted displays or HMDs as they have come to be known. Because of their electromechanical complexity body mounted, HMD's share several common shortcomings. HMD's are cumbersome and their weight makes them uncomfortable to wear, especially for long periods. They require adjustability in several axis to accommodate positioning of the glasses relative to earphones. For this reason they require numerous mechanical joints, structural members and straps. They are excessively heavy (at minimum of 6 ounces) to be supported largely by the forehead and bridge of the nose. Incorporating so many mechanically adjustable parts is one reason why they are also quite expensive. Since the parts must be made as light as possible, they are typically manufactured from plastic and are prone to breaking. Also the mechanical joints are inclined to snag themselves in the user's hair or clothing. Another major drawback of HMDs is the fact that they slip over the head much like a ball cap and thereby inevitably mess up the user's hair. This is especially undesirable when such devices are offered for use in public places where women and men are quite sensitive about their hair looking neat.
There is little rationale for using an HMD while sitting in chairs since most chairs are constructed with backrests which are in close proximity to the user's head. HMDs are heavy and cumbersome and have a tendency to cause headaches, skin irritation and hair loss due to snagging. Because of this, HMD's cannot include additional interface electronics such as A/V drives or television tuning circuits.
Several HMD's are presently available on the retail market. One such device was manufactured by (now defunct) Virtual i.O., Inc. of Seattle, Wash., ref. U.S. Des. Pat. No. 375,495 issued Nov. 12, 1996 to Maciness et al. This device, however, had several important drawbacks. The Virtual i.O. HMD was heavy (more than 6 ounces) and was all encompassing when installed on the head. HMD's, as mentioned above, are not stand alone A/V systems since they all require some form of electronic interface equipment before they can produce a visual image. Though Virtual i.O.'s industrial designers managed to produce a sleek, "space age" exterior design, the device was quite clumsy to put on and ultimately uncomfortable to wear. Once in place, it seemed longer than necessary to adequately adjust the eyeglasses and earphones to the user's particular anatomy. Readjustment was also required whenever the user dramatically changed body position. Within several minutes of use the device tended to cause pain where it rested on the left and right brow area of the temple. This headache, though minor, diminished somewhat after the user's head had become accustom to wearing the device. A lack of outward adjustability of the width of the glasses, however, caused greater degree of discomfort for those with larger craniums. Though the optic resolution of the device was good, it afforded only limited peripheral vision (beyond the screen). This tended to cause a feeling of being trapped by the virtual environment. The device also tended to snag hair.
In general the device incorporated more mechanical parts than would seem necessary. They were flimsy plastic parts and ultimately both earphone pivot joints (plastic) were easily broken. The V.i.O. device was also quite expensive and took several minutes to remove from the box and assemble. This device as well as all other HMD's would be defined only as semi-portable since they require a considerable amount of time to disassemble and store into the box before it can be hand carried. For these reasons, HMD's have never achieved a high degree of commercial success especially for use in a mass transit environment.
A similar headset device U.S. Pat. No. 5,381,183 issued Jul. 2, 1996 to Holmes, appears very similar in design to that of the Maciness device. The inherent claims focus mostly on the earphones and a unique (but complex) manner of adjustment. This device does not represent a stand alone A/V system, but only the glasses and unique earphones to transmit an image from some sort of video transceiver. The Holmes device does not appear to include an over-the-head strap such as the Maciness device. The majority of the weight of this device must then rest upon the bridge of the nose and a small portion on the brow. The patent description claims this device solves the anatomical differences unique to each individual head size by use of highly adjustable, miniature earphones such as those used in WALKMAN?. As would be expected the most difficult challenge to anatomical diversity relates more to adjustability of the glasses (optics) rather than the earphones. This design appears plagued with the same ergonomic shortcomings as those of the Maciness design i.e., too heavy, too physically uncomfortable, too complex in design, easy to damage, poor adjustability, and musses the hair as well as snagging it.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,276,471 issued Jan. 4, 1994 to Yamauchi et al. appears similar in design to previously described devices. This device seems to differ only in how it attempts to address certain anatomical variations. Though this device appears to have a better solution than Maciness and Holmes relative to adjusting for the width of the user's cranium, it too only partially mitigates the tremendous disparity in the anatomy of the human skull since it is designed with limited adjustability on only one axis. Though the mechanisms are designed differently then the Holmes and Maciness device's, this device appears to share the same faults inherent in other mode HMD's.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,273,185 issued to Greenwald, Dec. 23, 1996 describes a device which has specific application onboard commercial aircraft, primarily for the purpose of playing video games. This device does not attach to the human body such as HMD's other than the option to incorporate earphones. Because the intent of this device is to be physically interactive with the user it also employs a joystick. This invention appears to predate the advent of foldout trays which now are inherent to most all airline seats. There are both FAA rules as well as airline rules which would disallow use of this device for both utility and safety reasons. In fact CRT technology is no longer allowed in airline cabin environments.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,297,217 issued to Nguyen Dec. 7, 1993 reflects a evolution over CRT technology. This approach has been popular in recent years because it uses shallow LCD displays rather than CRT's. One of the major drawbacks of this type of device relates the fact that there are literally dozens of airline seat manufacturers in the world and none of their seats are designed the same way. Even if some "generic" package enabled retrofit to the variety of commercial seats that are manufactured, airplane makers as well as airlines seem unwilling to incur the modification costs that would be required. It should be noted that the GEC-Marconi company spent over $100 million dollars trying to develop a system which incorporates seat-embedded LCD displays. This particular system was scheduled to be installed on United Airlines new Boeing 777's. The system was ultimately abandoned for various reasons, but mainly because GEC-Marconi had failed to solve the challenging problems of such a venture. Lack of "private viewing" was not one of reasons this project was dismantled, however it might easily have become an issue had the system endured. Presently Matsushita Avionics is supplying a similar system to the Boeing company, however this system also has many undesirable attributes.
The following U.S. Patents are quite similar to each other in their approach to onboard A/V entertainment devices: U.S. Pat. No. 5,179,447 issued to Lain, Jan. 12, 1993, U.S. Pat. No. 5,374,104 issued to Moore et al., Dec. 20, 1994, U.S. Pat. No. 5,398,991 issued to Smith et al. Mar. 21, 1995 and U.S. Pat. No. 5,316,369 issued to Kanda, May 31, 1994. Each of these patents describes the common feature of a small LCD screen which is integral to the arm rest of airline seats or is modularly attached to a standard arm rest.
Other prior art exists which disclose incorporating audio speakers in headrests. The following patents are referred to in general: U.S. Pat. No. 2,452,103 issued to Conrad et al. on Oct. 26, 1948, U.S. Pat. No. 4,977,600 issued to Ziegler on Dec. 12, 1990 and U.S. Pat. No. 4,797,381 issued to Hufnagel on Jan. 10, 1989. All three of these patents refer to a headrest device which incorporates speakers internal to the device so as to enable the user to enjoy music while using the device. Though these devices look somewhat similar in structure, neither are intended for use with A/V technology nor are they designed to encapsulate any of the electronic components necessary to function as a stand alone A/V transceiver. Therefore, their are no directly comparable characteristics.
Based upon investigation of prior art and exemplified by the aforementioned inventions, it is seen that a need remains for an invention which offers a solution to the numerous and sundry ergonomic and socially provocative shortcomings inherent in present head mounted A/V devices.